Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GeneralVryth

  1. 3 atk dice in a full front arc to 2 atk dice. Trust me as an Interceptor fan, I would be all for an improvement there. But if you are looking for ships mechanically similar to the A-wing, base firepower needs to be a part of the discussion. While the Nantex has a 3 atk bullseye, the reality is most attacks are going to come from the turret arc. The 3 atk bullseye is going to behave like in built ordinance in a similar (though less punishing) vein as TIE Adv. X1. How many ships are there with 2 atk, 3 agility, 4 hull, and a reposition based ship ability? Outside of the A-wings that only leaves the Delta-7 and now the Nantex. If you drop the last requirement you can add in the TIE Adv. V1 and the M3-A, which gives you an idea of the kind of company the Natex is in before you look at the ship specific talents.
  2. While this is probably true, and the most likely outcome is only 1 talent slot, the Nantex is probably the most likely ship we have seen to get 2 talent slots. There are two main reasons for this, first, the Nantex is the ship most similar to the A-wing we have seen so far with the exception of the Delta-7 (Which has Force and the noted configs) and the same logic that lead to the dual talent slots for them can likely be applied to the Nantex. Second, the Nantex is the first ship we have seen so far with ship specific talents, and it's very likely the ship won't have any other upgrade slots besides talents and mods. So having a second talent will help keep it customizable. There is only 3 ships that have a single slot on their lowest initiative pilot. The TIE/ln, Modified TIE/ln, and the Fang, the first two are essentially canon fodder, and the Fang is a weird outlier. It doesn't seem like the Nantex is meant to be canon fodder, so if does only get 1 talent for the high initiative pilots it will be in rare company with the Fang.
  3. Another thing about the Outbound Flight is it shouldn't be in the cargo ships section if the GR-75 isn't. Each of the outer 6 ships dwarf a GR-75, and if memory serves are even bigger and heavier gunned than a Nebulon Frigate.
  4. I like that answer. I can't think of anything else that would be too ridiculous then. Both predator and marksmen synergize well with the primary arc but not overbearingly so.
  5. Fair, wrong post. But I don't see any post that explains Mep's intention before the one you quoted. Just the flippant one Kreen referenced. But with a desire not to drag this out further, I will leave it there. The ship specific ones certainly do provide that possibility. I wonder what the most broken talent combination you could come up with for the ship would be if it does have two. Ensnare and Outmaneuver could easily mean a 3+ red die attack with no defensive options for the vast majority of ships. Is that too powerful if Ensnare is expensive?
  6. @JJ48 here is the post you appear to be objecting to. The third line makes it pretty clear the poster is open to the idea that there may be a misunderstanding going on. What part of this strikes you as deliberately misinterpreting someone else's words?
  7. Rich coming from someone who helped cause a different thread to devolve into a second amendment rights debate. It's fine to de-rail a thread about your pet issue though right? You realize @Mep's last two comments on the issue before @SpiderMana responded were attacking Spider directly right? It's funny every time I see someone introduce the "SJW" phrase on the internet they are using it as an insult and usually are more disruptive than whatever person they are targeting. Of course calling someone a small person is always constructive to discourse, right? Personally, I would love to see the issue dropped since it does like a misunderstanding. But I hate hypocrites more. Though, if you would like to stop belaboring the point, by all means I am sure everyone would prefer it. As for Nantex I think it's going to be a niche ship. If you aren't regularly getting people in its bullseye it's unlikely to be worth its points because it will probably be expensive for just 2 atk die ship with a mobile arc.
  8. The real truth of the matter is all 3 upgrades tend to scale multiplicatively with the value of the ship they are added to (Shield/Hull Upgrade more so than Stealth Device). If you looked you would probably find SU/HU on ships that have a higher attack value more often as well. Both higher initiative and higher attack values correlate to a higher ship value. Agility is just the thing the best approximates the scaling of the added value of the upgrades. I do think it may be worth while to adjust how the upgrades scale with agility (maybe 2/3/4/5, and 3/4/5/6 instead of the current values). The reason 1 and 0 agility options for Shield and Hull upgrade are so popular is because medium and large ships tend to be more expensive while also having lower agility values. A lot of the high agility ships either tend to be cheaper, or don't have a mod a slot and so can't take advantage of the upgrades (one of the 3 would probably be stapled to every Defender if they had a mod slot).
  9. Setting aside my own popcorn in this thread for a moment. Given the number of questions we see in the rules forum where it seems like FFG didn't think through the full implications of the text, it seems very likely this is a another case of that. I would wager it's probably correct that the FFG was only thinking about the aggressive behavior when they wrote the rule. And given the highly political nature of the issue, I think it's highly unlikely that we are going to see any kind of clarification about whether legally carried concealed weapons were meant to be covered or not. Which sadly is going to leave this in the hands of the people running the events and venues where they are held until something happens or there is a enough community outcry to get them to issue a clarification. That said if they do issue a clarification I would wager it's likely going to be carrying a concealed weapon is a disqualifying offense at their events. While the issue may be split in the US as whole, in individual cities it tends to be one-sided (cities tend to have stronger anti-gun laws on average), and for their global consumer base it's probably also pretty one sided. So for those in favor of concealed carry, it would probably be wise to drop it. FFG has no incentive to come down on either side of a political issue unless forced too, but if they are, it's probably going to be whatever side favors their bottom line.
  10. I think the point in this case is that it can be refused, by calling over a marshal and asking them to deny it. Reading the contexts in which the word is used, it seems like it was placed there to encourage a positive environment where something can be asked with the expectation that it would be granted unless there is exceptional reason to deny it. Using words like order or demand makes the desired interaction sound more aggressive than FFG would probably like, hence using request when in reality it's closer to a demand (though it still can technically be denied). Edit: Also, while I am not a linguist, in most cases where I hear the word "request" used, it's only optional in the sense that if you plan on refusing you better have a **** good argument on your side or be prepared for consequences.
  11. It supports both readings, but anyone unwilling to share dice is going to get questions as to why. And a marshal siding with the refuser given this thread better have solid reasoning as well.
  12. Here are my thoughts, speaking as someone who doesn't go to tournaments (at least not yet), and strictly plays for fun and won't be impacted no matter what happens, but finds the discussion about the strategy and tactics interesting. First, neither player did anything wrong. They were both playing to win in their own way and they were not stalling. I have lost a tournament in a another game with a prize worth hundreds of dollars due to what felt like actual stalling, this was not that. Second, judges trying to fix the problem by telling players to engage is likely to cause more aggravation than it is to fix the problem. Because what one person may consider engaging, or gaining position to engage another is going to consider stalling. The real problem is neither player having an incentive to engage or move in such a way as to create an opening. And to provide my thoughts on this here is a quote from a different thread where this was also being discussed: In essence, either create a secondary objective that provides an incentive to move, or if your not going to do that force each ship to "mobile fortress" on its own merits. Part of a ships price accounts for their maneuverability, if you want to fly in a circle to try and create an ideal engagement you should have constraints on how you spend points to do that effectively. And for the corner cases still left just move the stupid clock to where it needs to be to change behavior or go to final salvo.
  13. I don't agree with the warning to force people to engage either. It gets too subjective on what counts as engaging. Assuming some kind of objective or secondary point system isn't added I do think there are two changes that would further reduce the instance of this kind of outcome (which I don't think anyone involved really enjoys). First the fortressing rule should be expanded/modified slightly to encompass the idea that the only ships that can remain in the same location several turns in a row without engaging an enemy ship are those that can do it without being within range 0 of a friendly ship, any other ship persisting in that state for X amount of rounds would be destroyed. I think flying circuits like most of the ships were doing in the match in question is fine, because the maneuverability to perform a tight circuit is part of the cost of the ship, and it's unlikely two squads are going to have circuits of the same period, so there should be odd openings that come from the different in periods. In the case of this game, forcing the Arc and Delta-7 to move would have likely forced some kind of engagement because it would be hard for the Arc to fly a circuit without exposing itself eventually, especially when maneuvering around the other friendlies. Second, if both squads can successfully fly repeating circuits without creating an opening, start speeding up the clock or periodically fast forward it X amount of minutes, this will help the game come to a quicker resolution. If both players just want to go to final salvo, that should be an option as well. Just my two cents as an outsider in this case.
  14. As someone who doesn't go to tournaments, but finds this particular discussion kind of interesting because of what it says about what the extremes of the game can lead to, I do have one question. If both you and your opponent new what the endgame was going to be and were okay with it, why not just call a tournament organizer (or marshal?) over and ask if you can fast forward the game clock like 20 or 30 minutes, or something? Is that just not allowed by the rules? It seems like an option to skip over the section of game both players have already decided they were willing to skip over would be beneficial for everyone involved. For the players it reduces the chance of mistakes due to fatigue (which I assume wasn't part of the plan), and for everyone else is just speeds up something that could be fairly judged as boring from a spectators point of view.
  15. Indeed. This is actually why I don't think that ability would be a good idea (or would need to cost a lot). It would be to large of a momentum shift. Your attack misses and I get Force.
  16. Indeed. It's sad too, I was hoping he would have a good ace style ability like Anakin. When I saw the ability I figure his real ability would be being a cheap I5 like Tali. Upon seeing his points, nope he's just bad.
  17. Eh... I don't think so. That would either just make them even more expensive on the higher Force pilots or cheaper for the generic/1 Force pilots. The problem though is you still only recharge 1 Force a turn, and you're adding an option to spend Force on a chassis full of them. People, get into the mistake (in my opinion) of thinking that 2 or 3 Force is a lot better than 1. But the truth is each additional Force has progressively less value because the recharge is always 1 a turn. The only reason Battle Meditation is so popular on Delta-7s is that is the only ship that can use it, and it's a good power. I really don't think there is a good solution unless FFG wants to start adjusting power costs based off chassis. The next best option is just making the other Force powers more competitively, and relying on the scarcity of Force pilots (especially generics) to keep things in check. Now I actually do think giving some chassis' free points to spend on certain upgrade slots would be a boon for the game overall. Right now a lot of the problems when it comes to balancing ordinance focused platforms is keeping them cheap enough to be able to afford munitions and still being competitive while not making them so cheap that they can be massed. Imagine if the Z-95 and V-19 each costed one or two more points, but got a 2 to 4 point reduction on the missiles they purchase? Or for a more dramatic example, if Bombers, Y-wings, and Punishers each costed 3 to 5 points more, but got 6 to 8 points worth of free ordinance or turrets? Those ships now start playing like the ordinance ships they are meant to be because they are strongly incentivized to take ordinance instead of being minimalist. You could do the same thing with Interceptors and Kirahxs with modifications, and even the A-wings and talents. Also both Tie Advanced with the Sensors/Missiles. Or both A-wings with Talents/Missiles. With the Delta-7 it would be in the area of the Force. If they all got a 2 points free to spend on Force talents without any actual cost increase how much more options would that feel like it's opening with them? It would certainly make things more complicated, but it's interesting to think about as well.
  18. I wholeheartedly agree with the idea that a lot of the Force powers are overpriced, even more so on Delta (and yet even more so when you're taking 7B if it scales by agility). Predictive shot should only cost 1 point, when you look at what it's really doing, on average you are removing a single green die. There are cases where you will do more and others when you won't be able to use it at all. And removing that die is really no better than using a Force normally to get an extra hit if you rolled an eyeball. So unless you have Force to burn it's only providing a secondary option in many cases. I already commented earlier in this thread how Brilliant Evasion is hot garbage. I mean in theory if there is a time you could activate it and you only have 1 Force and no Focus, then it's doing the job of a Hull Upgrade, but how often is that going to come up before the ship dies outright? For a ship with 2 agility it's a 1/16 chance, I don't expect most 2 agility ships are going to survive even 8 attacks without other defenses in their favor. And while it's more likely to come up on a 3 agility ship, how many of those have more than 4 or 5 hull? What are the odds you roll that before you pop? It should only cost 1 on 2 agility or lower ships and no more than 3 on 3 agility ships. SNR should scale at half the rate, 20 points is still expensive even on an I6 that can abuse it. That is all of course secondary to the problem of putting a Force upgrade on a Delta-7. The beginning of this thread talked about the diminishing returns on options. Force powers on the Delta-7 is a perfect example of this. Every Delta-7 pilot besides Mace and the generic have 3 built in ways to spend the Force beyond the base effect. Every other non Delta-7 pilot has at most 1. Every Force power besides Hate is just another way to spend the Force. Your Luke and generic Inquisitor get a lot more out of their first new option on how to spend Force, than Obi or Anakin are going to get on their 4th. I am not sure there is a good solution to this either, unless you just made Force upgrades cheaper on the Delta-7 specifically. The next best option is balancing the prices so they are questionable on the Delta-7 but almost must pick on other ships (which may not be a bad thing given how few Force pilots their are and their inherent cost already).
  19. Yeah there is definitely something going on here. The 104th arc does seem under costed by a couple points. And every V-19 besides the Gold Squadron Pilot feels over costed. Besides the point issues though, I think the bigger problem for the V-19 is it doesn't have the killer upgrade to make it solid, instead of generic filler. Just look at how popular Energy Shell Charges are for Vultures. If Homing Missiles were a little cheaper then maybe them plus Synchronized Consoles would be enough, but even then Homing Missiles rarely feel like they hit hard enough for what they do because it's almost always a no brainer to choose the single guaranteed damage. if when you chose to take the homing missile damage, if you had to roll a red dice for a chance at a second (like crossing an asteroid) it would make the decision a lot harder and probably V-19s better as well. I think V-19s suffer form the same missile issues as the A-wing, Z-95, Advanced x1, and maybe even the Advanced v1. Missiles either are too expensive for what they provide, especially when you have to spend extra points or actions to be able to get the target lock to be able to even shoot during the first exchange. It's a shame we didn't get a good generic missile in the Guardians of the Republic pack (an upgraded version of Homing Missile would give missiles a nice niche and fix a lot of the missile issues in general).
  20. I think this hits the nail on the head pretty well (Though remember you have Odd-Ball as an I5 for both the V-19 and ARC). I think what you are going to see a lot of with both the Republic and CIS is lists with a power ace/command ship and then being filled out with Generics. The CIS doesn't seem like it has another option unless you go double Infiltrator. There might be a couple of more ace based Republic lists but whether they will be competitive with the ace lists of other factions is a good question, as they will likely have lower initiative. I don't know, it will be certainly be a test to how strong the Force really is.
  21. I think I would break down the pilots in the following way: Solid: Anakin, Mace, Ahsoka Alright: Obi-wan, Saesee, Luminara, Jedi Knight Below Par: Plo Koon, Barriss
  22. That's an interesting counterpoint on Anakin. You could buy the hull mod (and even accounting for the 7B adjustments) which would make Anakin 4 points more without the hull difference, for the more open dial, 2 extra Force to play with throughout the game, potential to avoid losing all actions in a round, all in exchange for not being able to get full double mods for his double actions. That probably is worth 4 points, if not more. Maybe it's just Nien that's off in this comparison. I am deferring to you somewhat on Luminara. I haven't played her much, and her ability is definitely one that will need to be played plenty to properly judge. That's what I said her and Barris were arguable. That have the look of something that could be less useful (especially Barris), but they also had the look of something hard to judge. You may be right about this in the long run, for most of the pilots. I do still think they messed up Plo, who is going to need a 3-5 point drop to feel right. Maybe more of their cost issues could be sitting in the upgrade options they want to take, SNR is clearly overpriced (though it was insane before) and probably should be more like 12/12/12/12/16/20/24. Battle Meditation would be silly on an I 1 pilot if any could take it and probably should be more like 7/7/7/7/8/10/12. 7B could get a similar treatment 14/14/14/14/15/16/17. Same with CLT 4/4/4/4/5/7/9. And of course Brilliant Evasion at just a flat 2 or 3 points.
  23. I did read the OP (admittedly, I did so shortly after the thread was posted instead of of shortly before responding). I am in the decreasing marginal returns bucket. I fully agree with the premise that something with more options is worth than something with less options. The question is how much more? Rarely, but sometimes the answer is 0 (on a 4 atk die ship, having the option to use a HLC even if it is free is still not worth anything). Usually, though additional options are worth something, whether that is a lot (SNR on high I pilots) or a little (concussion missiles on a Defender). I think in the case of the Delta-7s on average the additional option is costing more than its worth. I don't think the Delta-7s are super over costed or anything, in my mind we are talking about 1 to 4 points depending on pilot, and maybe 1 to 3 more depending on config. The numbers are small enough that it would take a lot of play testing to tease out perfect balance. We agree on Plo it looks like, and probably on Bariss/Lum as well. My suspicion with them is I will need to play them more to have a good feel for their impact. On the Anakin to Nien comparison, you're right he has more options, but you are also paying 18 more points for those options while having 1 less hull. I think perhaps a better thing to say for me with the Delta-7 pilots is they are disappointing or underwhelming. They may be balanced, they may be a few points over costed but in general these unique pilots some of whom were considered some of the Jedi orders best (which when you are talking about an group of people with supernatural reflexes due to limited pre-cognition, that should be saying something), and you compare their abilities to other pilots they are just underwhelming. In some cases (like Anakin) it's a very a similar ability that just costs a Force instead of being free. I said in other threads that I had hoped FFG would error on the side of making Jedi powerful and appropriately expensive instead of weaker and cheaper. It seems like we got the weaker abilities/chassis without the everything must go prices you see on some other ships. Now on a slightly tangential issue, who the heck came up with the pricing on Brilliant Evasion? While it is technically possible it could be used on 1 agility ship, how many times in a game are you expecting to get a roll with 2 eyeballs (which would take getting a second defense from range or obstacles and rolling 2 eyeballs which is a 1/16 chance with 2 dice)? That is not worth 2 points, especially in comparison to something like Elusive for 3 points. And the price points for 2 and 3 agility are little better. It should cost like 0/1/2/3 if not 0/0/1/3. This is even more egregious because of the way 7B penalizes taking upgrades that scale by agility (which is most of the mods and one of the handful of Force powers a Delta-7 will want to take). Since only agility 2 or 3 ships are ever likely to take this in the first place maybe it should just be a flat 2 or 3 points.
  24. I have no doubt that the Delta-7s can be played well. But I also agree that they seem just a touch overcosted and several of their abilities feel underwhelming because they cost Force tokens where other pilots get similar abilities for free (compare Anakin to Nien Numb, did Anakin's ability really need to cost Force?), or the effects are just worse than other things you would rather spend your Force on (purple evade, Plo Koon's ability, arguably Barris's and Luminara's abilities). The various upgrades you might put on the ship to help round it out just amplify this effect (CLT, 7B, and Battle Meditation are all very expensive). I may be wrong, I know someone on the grape-vine said they heard that these ships were really good in playtesting and so got last minute price tweaks upwards. The costs look like it. All of the above combined with the flat out weird price difference between the base generic V-19 and ARC versus their elite and unique counter-parts definitely seems to drive the Republic to a couple of specific list types if you want the most bang for your buck. I think the CIS is going to end up with notably more varied and interesting lists than the Republic at the moment just due to their better balanced prices.
  25. I will join the chorus saying Impervium with Soulless One and Hull Upgrade without.
  • Create New...